document_title: AP Poll

question_text: when does the ap college football poll come out

text: AP Poll

text: College football[edit]

text: The football poll is released Sundays at 2pm Eastern time during the football season, unless ranked teams have not finished their games.

text: History[edit]

text: The AP college football poll has a long history. The news media began running their own polls of sports writers to determine who was, by popular opinion, the best football team in the country at the end of the season. One of the earliest such polls was the AP College Football Poll, first run in 1934.[3] In 1935, AP sports editor Alan J. Gould declared a three way tie for national champion in football between Minnesota, Princeton, and Southern Methodist. Minnesota fans protested, and a number of Gould's colleagues led by Charles "Cy" Sherman suggested he create a poll of sports editors instead of only using his own list, and the next year the poll was born.[4] It has run continuously from 1936.[5]

text: Due to the long-standing historical ties between individual college football conferences and high-paying bowl games like the Rose Bowl and Orange Bowl, the NCAA had not held a tournament or championship game to determine the champion of what is now the highest division, NCAA Division I, Football Bowl Subdivision (the Division I, Football Championship Subdivision and lower divisions do hold championship tournaments). As a result, the public and the media began to acknowledge the leading vote-getter in the final AP Poll as the national champion for that season.

text: While the AP Poll currently lists the Top 25 teams in the nation, from 1936 to 1961 the wire service only ranked 20 teams. From 1962 to 1967 only 10 teams were recognized. From 1968 to 1988, the AP again resumed its Top 20 before expanding to the current 25 teams in 1989.

text: The AP began conducting a preseason poll starting in 1950.[6][7]

text: At the end of the 1947 season the AP released an unofficial post-bowl poll which differed from the regular season final poll.[8] Until the 1968 college football season, the final AP poll of the season was released following the end of the regular season, with the lone exception of the 1965 season. In 1964, Alabama was named the national champion in the final AP Poll following the completion of the regular season, but lost in the Orange Bowl to Texas, leaving Arkansas as the only undefeated, untied team after the Razorbacks defeated Nebraska in the Cotton Bowl Classic. In 1965, the AP's decision to wait to crown its champion paid handsomely, as top-ranked Michigan State lost to UCLA in the Rose Bowl, number two Arkansas lost to LSU in the Cotton Bowl Classic, and fourth-ranked Alabama defeated third-ranked Nebraska in the Orange Bowl, vaulting the Crimson Tide to the top of the AP's final poll (Michigan State was named national champion in the final UPI Coaches Poll, which did not conduct a post-bowl poll).

text: Beginning in the 1968 season, the post bowl game poll became permanent and the AP championship reflected the bowl game results. The UPI did not follow suit with the coaches' poll until the 1974 season.

text: No. 1 vs. No. 2[edit]

text: As of the completion of the 2015 season the number one ranked team has faced the number two ranked team 50 times since the inception of the AP Poll in 1936.[9] The number one team has a record of 28–20–2 against the number two team.[9]

text:
No. 1 vs. No. 2 games

Light blue indicates bowl game

Season
No. 1
Result
No. 2
Site
Event

1943
Notre Dame
35–12
Michigan
Michigan Stadium • Ann Arbor, MI
1943 Michigan–Notre Dame football rivalry game

1943
Notre Dame
14–13
Iowa Pre-Flight
Notre Dame Stadium • Notre Dame, IN

1944
Army
23–7
Navy
Baltimore Stadium • Baltimore, MD
1944 Army–Navy Game

1945
Army
48–0
Notre Dame
Yankee Stadium • New York, NY
1945 Army–Notre Dame football rivalry game

1945
Army
32-13
Navy
Philadelphia Municipal Stadium • Philadelphia, PA
1945 Army–Navy Game

1946
Army
0–0
Notre Dame
Yankee Stadium • New York, NY
1946 Army vs. Notre Dame football game

1962
USC
42–37
Wisconsin
Rose Bowl Stadium • Pasadena, CA
1963 Rose Bowl

1963
Oklahoma
7–28
Texas
Cotton Bowl • Dallas, TX
1963 Red River Shootout game

1963
Texas
28–6
Navy
Cotton Bowl • Dallas, TX
1964 Cotton Bowl Classic

1966
Notre Dame
10–10
Michigan State
Spartan Stadium • East Lansing, MI
1966 Notre Dame vs. Michigan State football game

1968
Purdue
37–22
Notre Dame
Notre Dame Stadium • Notre Dame, IN
1968 Shillelagh Trophy game

1968
Ohio State
27–16
USC
Rose Bowl Stadium • Pasadena, CA
1969 Rose Bowl

1969
Texas
15–14
Arkansas
Razorback Stadium • Fayetteville, AR
1969 Texas vs. Arkansas football game

1971
Nebraska
35–31
Oklahoma
Oklahoma Memorial Stadium • Norman, OK
1971 Nebraska vs. Oklahoma football game

1971
Nebraska
38–6
Alabama
Miami Orange Bowl • Miami, FL
1972 Orange Bowl

1978
Penn State
7–14
Alabama
Louisiana Superdome • New Orleans, LA
1979 Sugar Bowl

1981
USC
28–24
Oklahoma
Los Angeles Coliseum • Los Angeles

1982
Georgia
23–27
Penn State
Louisiana Superdome • New Orleans, LA
1983 Sugar Bowl

1985
Iowa
12–10
Michigan
Kinnick Stadium • Iowa City, IA

1986
Oklahoma
16–28
Miami
Miami Orange Bowl • Miami, FL

1986
Miami
10–14
Penn State
Sun Devil Stadium • Tempe, AZ
1987 Fiesta Bowl

1987
Nebraska
7–17
Oklahoma
Memorial Stadium • Lincoln, NE
1987 Nebraska–Oklahoma football rivalry game

1987
Oklahoma
14–20
Miami
Miami Orange Bowl • Miami, FL
1988 Orange Bowl

1988
Notre Dame
27–10
USC
Los Angeles Coliseum • Los Angeles
1988 Jeweled Shillelagh game

1989
Notre Dame
24–19
Michigan
Michigan Stadium • Ann Arbor, MI
1989 Michigan–Notre Dame football rivalry game

1991
Florida State
16–17
Miami
Doak Campbell Stadium • Tallahassee, FL
1991 Miami vs. Florida State football game

1992
Miami
13–34
Alabama
Louisiana Superdome • New Orleans, LA
1993 Sugar Bowl

1993
Florida State
24–31
Notre Dame
Notre Dame Stadium • Notre Dame, IN
1993 Florida State vs. Notre Dame football game

1993
Florida State
18–16
Nebraska
Miami Orange Bowl • Miami, FL
1994 Orange Bowl

1995
Nebraska
62–24
Florida
Sun Devil Stadium • Tempe, AZ
1996 Fiesta Bowl

1996
Florida
21–24
Florida State
Doak Campbell Stadium • Tallahassee, FL
1996 Florida–Florida State football rivalry game

1998
Tennessee
23–16
Florida State
Sun Devil Stadium • Tempe, AZ
1999 Fiesta Bowl

1999
Florida State
46–29
Virginia Tech
Louisiana Superdome • New Orleans, LA
2000 Sugar Bowl

2002
Miami
24–31 2OT
Ohio State
Sun Devil Stadium • Tempe, AZ
2003 Fiesta Bowl

2004
USC
55–19
Oklahoma
Pro Player Stadium • Miami Gardens, FL
2005 Orange Bowl

2005
USC
38–41
Texas
Rose Bowl Stadium • Pasadena, CA
2006 Rose Bowl

2006
Ohio State
24–7
Texas
Darrell K Royal – Texas Memorial Stadium • Austin, TX

2006
Ohio State
42–39
Michigan
Ohio Stadium • Columbus, OH
2006 Michigan vs. Ohio State football game

2006
Ohio State
14–41
Florida
University of Phoenix Stadium • Glendale, AZ
2007 BCS National Championship Game

2007
Ohio State
24–38
LSU
Louisiana Superdome • New Orleans, LA
2008 BCS National Championship Game

2008
Alabama
20–31
Florida
Georgia Dome • Atlanta, GA
2008 SEC Championship Game

2008
Florida
24–14
Oklahoma
Sun Life Stadium • Miami Gardens, FL
2009 BCS National Championship Game

2009
Florida
13–32
Alabama
Georgia Dome • Atlanta, GA
2009 SEC Championship Game

2009
Alabama
37–21
Texas
Rose Bowl Stadium • Pasadena, CA
2010 BCS National Championship Game

2010
Auburn
22–19
Oregon
University of Phoenix Stadium • Glendale, AZ
2011 BCS National Championship Game

2011
LSU
9–6 OT
Alabama
Bryant–Denny Stadium • Tuscaloosa, AL
2011 LSU vs. Alabama football game

2011
LSU
0–21
Alabama
Mercedes-Benz Superdome • New Orleans, LA
2012 BCS National Championship Game

2012
Notre Dame
14–42
Alabama
Sun Life Stadium • Miami Gardens, FL
2013 BCS National Championship Game

2013
Florida State
34–31
Auburn
Rose Bowl · Pasadena, CA
2014 BCS National Championship Game

2015
Clemson
40–45
Alabama
University of Phoenix Stadium · Glendale, AZ
2016 College Football Playoff National Championship

text: AP Poll inclusion in the BCS[edit]

text: In 1997, the Bowl Championship Series (BCS) was developed to try to unify the poll results by picking two teams for a "real" national championship game. For the first several years the AP Poll factored in the determination of the BCS rankings, along with other factors including the Coaches Poll and computer-based polls. Because of a series of controversies surrounding the BCS, the AP demanded in December, 2004, that its poll no longer be used in the BCS rankings,[10] and so the 2004–2005 season was the last season that the AP Poll was used for this purpose.

text: In the 2003 season the BCS system broke down when the final BCS standings ranked the University of Southern California (USC) at No. 3 while the two human polls in the system had ranked USC at No. 1. As a result, USC did not play in the BCS' designated national championship game. After defeating another highly ranked team, Michigan, in its final game, the AP Poll kept USC at No. 1 while the Coaches Poll was contractually obligated to select the winner of the BCS game, Louisiana State University (LSU), as the No. 1 team. The resulting split national title was the very problem that the BCS was created to solve, and has been widely considered an embarrassment.[11]

text: In 2004, a new controversy erupted at the end of the season when Auburn and Utah, who both finished the regular season 12–0, were left out of the BCS title game in favor of Oklahoma who also was 12–0 and had won decisively over Colorado in the Big 12 Championship game. USC went on to a win easily over Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl while Auburn and Utah both won their bowl games, leaving three undefeated teams at the end of the season. Also, in that same year, Texas made up late ground on California (Cal) in the BCS standings and as a result grabbed a high-payout, at-large spot in the Rose Bowl. Previous to that poll, Cal had been ranked ahead of Texas in both human polls and the BCS poll. Going into their final game, the Golden Bears were made aware that while margin of victory did not affect computer rankings, it did affect human polls and just eight voters changing their vote could affect the final standings.[12] Both teams won their game that week, but the Texas coach, Mack Brown, had made a public effort to lobby for his team to be moved higher in the ranking. When the human polls were released, Texas remained behind Cal, but it had closed the gap enough so that the BCS poll (which determines placement) placed Texas above Cal, angering both Cal and its conference, the Pac-10.[13] The final poll positions had been unchanged with Cal at No. 4 AP, No. 4 coaches, and No. 6 computers polls and Texas at No. 6 AP, No. 5 coaches, and No. 4 computer polls.[13] The AP Poll voters were caught in the middle because their vote changes were automatically made public, while the votes of the Coaches poll were kept confidential. Although there had been a more substantial shift in the votes of the Coaches Poll, the only clear targets for the ire of fanatical fans were the voters in the AP Poll. While officials from both Cal and the Pac-10 called for the coaches' votes to be made public, the overtures were turned down and did little to solve the problem of AP voters. Cal went on to lose to Texas Tech in the Holiday Bowl. Texas defeated Michigan in the Rose Bowl.

text: Many members of the press who voted in the AP Poll were upset by the controversy and, at the behest of its members, the AP asked that its poll no longer be used in the BCS rankings. The 2004 season was the last season that the AP Poll was used in the BCS rankings, it was replaced in the BCS equation by the newly created Harris Interactive College Football Poll.[14]

text: Final AP football polls[edit]

text: Other media football polls[edit]

text: The AP Poll is not the only college football poll. The other major poll is the Coaches Poll, which has been sponsored by several organizations: the United Press (1950–1957), the United Press International (1958–1990), USA Today (1991–present), CNN (1991–1996), and ESPN (1997–2005). Having two major polls has led to numerous "split" national titles, where the two polls disagreed on the No. 1 team. This has occurred on eleven different occasions (1954, 1957, 1965, 1970, 1973, 1974, 1978, 1990, 1991, 1997, 2003).

text: College basketball[edit]

text: In Division I men's and women's college basketball, the AP Poll is largely just a tool to compare schools throughout the season and spark debate, as it has no bearing on postseason play. Generally, all top 25 teams in the poll are invited to the men's and women's NCAA basketball tournament, also known as March Madness. The poll is usually released every Monday and voters' ballots are made public.[15]

text: Men's basketball[edit]

text: The AP began compiling a ranking of the top 20 college men's basketball teams during the 1948–1949 season. It has issued this poll continuously since the 1950–1951 season. UCLA has been ranked #1 the most times (134), with Duke and North Carolina trailing at 132 and 110, respectively.[16]

text: Women's basketball[edit]

text: The women's basketball poll began during the 1976–1977 season, and was initially compiled by Mel Greenberg and published by The Philadelphia Inquirer. At first, it was a poll of coaches conducted via telephone, where coaches identified top teams and a list of the Top 20 team was produced. The initial list of coaches did not include Pat Summitt, who asked to join the group, not to improve her rankings, but because of the lack of media coverage, Summitt believed it would be a good way to stay on top of who the top teams were outside of her own schedule.[17] The contributors continued to be coaches until 1994, when the AP took over administration of the poll from Greenberg, and switched to a panel of writers.[18] In 1994, Tennessee started out as No. 1 in the polls with Connecticut at No. 4. After losses by the No. 2 and No. 3 teams, Tennessee and Connecticut were ranked No. 1 and No. 2, headed into a showdown, scheduled as a special event on Martin Luther King day, the only women's basketball game scheduled on that day. Because of the unusual circumstances, the decision was made to hold off the AP voting for one day, to ensure it would be after the game. Connecticut won the game, and moved into first place in the AP poll, published on Tuesday for the only time. (Connecticut went on to complete an undefeated season.)[19] Over the history of the poll, over 255 coaches have had a team represented in polls.[20]

text: NFL football[edit]

text: Beginning in 2012, the AP began issuing a weekly pro football ranking, the AP Pro32 rankings.[21]


document_title: Elections in South Africa

question_text: who is allowed to vote in south africa

question_tokens: who is allowed to vote in south africa

root

text: Elections in South Africa

text: History[edit]

text: Before Union[edit]

text: When the British took over the Cape, first in 1795 and then more permanently in 1806, they inherited a sprawling, thinly populated pastoral settlement that depended on the labour of slaves and a rural workforce of indigenous Khoikhoi whose condition was akin to serfdom. In 1806 the entire population of the colony consisted of fewer than 80,000 people: 26,768 whites, 1,200 free blacks (manumitted slaves), 29,861 slaves and 20,426 Khoikhoi.[1] From early on the British made a determined effort to remodel this society by introducing principles of freedom and equality before the law. In 1807 the British government ended the slave trade and, finally, in 1833 outlawed the practice of slavery throughout the Empire.

tag: p

text: Under pressure from the humanitarian lobby in England, acting in concert with a local missionary campaign, the government abolished the Khoikhoi’s serf-like status by the promulgation of Ordinance 50 of 1828.[2] According to the government’s instructions, ‘all Hottentots and other free persons of colour lawfully residing in the Colony are, and shall be, in most full and ample manner, entitled to all and every rights, privileges and benefits of the law to which any other of His Majesty’s subjects are, or can be, entitled.’[3] This became known as the ‘Hottentots’ Magna Carta’. The equality of all people – black or white – appeared to be assured. As a result, when municipal boards were set up in the colony’s towns and villages from 1836, any male resident who lived in property with a yearly rent of not less than £10 could vote for his town board. From the very beginning, therefore, people of colour were able to participate in local elections.[4]

text: This principle of a non-racial franchise was to be entrenched when the Cape was granted representative government in 1853. Part of the reason, no doubt, lay in the desire to give propertied Khoikhoi a greater stake in the political system. In 1850 the Khoikhoi of the Kat River Settlement had risen in rebellion and, though the uprising was defeated, it did concentrate the minds of those colonial officials and politicians who were responsible for drawing up the constitution of 1853. As the Cape’s Attorney General, William Porter, famously said: ‘I would rather meet the Hottentot at the hustings voting for his representative than meet the Hottentot in the wilds with a gun on his shoulder.’[5] In terms of the constitution of 1853, any man who owned property worth at least £25 was entitled to vote for or stand in the Cape’s Parliament. By 1886 Africans made up 43 per cent of the vote in six constituencies of the Eastern Cape, and were a real political force.[6] It was not long before white politicians began challenging the rights of Coloureds and Africans to vote. The passage of the Franchise and Ballot Act, which raised the property qualification from £25 to £75 in 1892, met with an angry response from African and Coloured voters.[7]

text: These developments were not without criticism or opposition. Indeed, the abolition of slavery and the promulgation of Ordinance 50, and the accompanying extension of rights to the black population, were deeply resented by the white Dutch farmers of the Cape as undermining their way of life. Starting in 1834, thousands of these Boers set out on one of the most defining events of white South African history – the Great Trek.[8][better source needed] The Dutch who moved away from the Cape did so in the hope of leaving British control and British ways of ordering society behind them. In the interior of southern Africa they would carve out independent states for themselves, the South African (or Transvaal) Republic and the Orange Free State, whose constitutions enshrined the principle of no equality between white and black in either church or state.

text: After the Second Anglo-Boer war, whites made peace with each other[9][better source needed] and in October 1909 came together in a National Convention. Held in Durban it brought together politicians from the Cape, Transvaal, Natal and the Orange River Colony, as well as Rhodesia. Their aim was to draw up a constitution for the a Union of South Africa, uniting the British posessions.[10][better source needed]

text: Only white men were invited to consider the future of their country; women and all other racial groups were excluded. This was in some ways anomalous. After all, qualified black men had enjoyed the vote in the Cape since the 1850s and – as long as they had sufficient property, income and education – continued to do so. By 1909 there were 14,388 Coloured and 6,633 African voters in the Cape.[11] Between them they made up 14.8 per cent of the electorate. In Natal, too, African men had the right to vote, but it was so constrained by hurdles that it was almost theoretical. Not only did they have to prove they had property, but they also had to prove that they were ‘civilised’ and had been so for seven years. The Governor might then grant them the vote. As we have seen, Indians also had to overcome obstacles designed to prevent them from being enfranchised.[12] In the Transvaal and Orange Free State only white men could vote.

text: The Cape argued that their non-racial franchise should be extended across the proposed Union. This was rejected by the Transvaal and Orange Free State. Finally a compromise of sorts was arrived at, maintaining the Cape’s existing voting system, without extending it to the rest of the country, but insisting that this compromise was entrenched in the constitution.[13] Africans and Coloured people would retain most of their voting rights in the Cape rights, but would not receive them in any other part of the Union.

text: African and Coloured politicians came together to resist these plans, and called on a former Cape Prime Minister, William Philip Schreiner, to lead a delegation to Britain to call for the Cape franchise to be implemented in the whole of South Africa.[14][better source needed] This he did, but the delegation was unsuccessful in its appeal, despite receiving considerable support from the infant Labour Party and other liberal British organisations.[15]

text: At the Union[edit]

text: The Union of South Africa was created on 31 May 1910 by the South Africa Act 1909, an act of the Imperial Parliament. The House of Assembly (the lower house of the newly created Parliament of South Africa) and the provincial councils were elected by first-past-the-post voting in single-member electoral divisions. The franchise in these elections was initially the same as the franchise for the lower houses in the four colonies that had formed the Union, so there were different qualifications in different provinces.

text: In the Transvaal and the Orange Free State the vote was limited by law to white men over the age of 21. In Natal the vote was limited to men over 21 who met property and literacy qualifications; in theory this could include non-white men but in practice only very small numbers managed to qualify: in 1910 over 99% of the electorate was white. In the Cape Province the franchise was also limited to men over 21 who met property and literacy qualifications, and non-white men did qualify in significant numbers, making up approximately 15% of the electorate in 1910. The qualifications in the Cape and Natal also excluded a substantial number of poorer white men. Only white men could stand for election to the House of Assembly, even from the Cape constituencies. The franchise rights of non-white voters in the Cape (but not in Natal) were entrenched in the South Africa Act by a provision that they could only be reduced by an act of Parliament passed by a two-thirds majority of both houses of Parliament sitting in a joint session.

text: Enfranchisement of white women and poor whites[edit]

text: In 1930 the National Party government of J. B. M. Hertzog passed the Women's Enfranchisement Act, which extended the right to vote and the right to stand for election to all white women over the age of 21. In the following year the Franchise Laws Amendment Act lifted the property and literacy requirements for white male voters in the Cape and Natal, with the result that all white citizens over 21 were enfranchised. As the exclusion of women and the literacy and property qualifications continued to apply to non-white voters, these acts had the effect of diluting their electoral power by more than doubling the number of white voters.

text: At the next following general election in 1933, Leila Reitz was elected as the first female MP, representing Parktown for the South African Party.

text: Segregation of black voters[edit]

text: In 1936 the Hertzog government enacted the Representation of Natives Act, which removed black voters from the common voters' rolls and placed them on separate "native voters' rolls". The act was passed by the required two-thirds majority in a joint session. Black voters could no longer vote in ordinary elections for the House of Assembly or the Cape Provincial Council; instead they would separately elect three members of the assembly and two members of the council. Four senators would also be indirectly elected by chiefs, tribal councils and local councils for "native areas". The Representation of Natives Act was repealed in 1959 and consequently the seats of the "native representative members" were abolished in 1960. From this point the only political representation of black South Africans was in the Bantustan legislatures.

text: Segregation of coloured voters[edit]

text: After coming to power in 1948 the National Party engaged in a policy of removing coloured voters in a similar manner to black voters. In 1951 Parliament passed the Separate Representation of Voters Act, which removed coloured voters from the common voters roll and instead allowed them to separately elect four MPs. The act was challenged on the basis that it had not been passed with a two-thirds majority in a joint sitting, as required by the South Africa Act, and in 1952 the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court declared it to be invalid.

text: A subsequent attempt by the government to circumvent the Supreme Court by creating a High Court of Parliament failed. In the election of 1953, coloured voters in the Cape cast their ballots in the same constituencies as white voters. In 1955 the government introduced a new act which reconstituted the Senate, providing the two-thirds majority necessary to validate the Separate Representation of Voters Act.

text: This separate representation of coloured voters in the House of Assembly was ended in 1970. Instead, all coloured adults were given the right to vote for the Coloured Persons' Representative Council, which had limited legislative powers and was permanently dissolved in 1980.

text: Republic referendum[edit]

text: In 1960 a whites-only referendum was held to decide whether South Africa should become a republic. No changes were made to the franchise with the Republic's emergence in 1961. However, with the policy of establishing Bantustans the remaining black representation in the Senate was completely removed.

text: Tricameral Parliament[edit]

text: In 1983 a referendum on constitutional reform was held, as a result of which the Tricameral Parliament was formed, consisting of three separate houses to represent white, coloured and Indian South Africans. The existing House of Assembly was retained with its white electorate, while two new houses were created: the House of Representatives elected by coloured voters, and the House of Delegates elected by Indian voters. Elections to these houses were conducted on the basis of first-past-the-post voting in single-member electoral divisions.

text: End of Apartheid[edit]

text: During the negotiations to end apartheid the Interim Constitution was enacted. It introduced universal suffrage on a non-racial basis, and replaced first-past-the-post voting with party-list proportional representation. South Africans of all races took part in the first fully democratic elections in 1994. "Universal adult suffrage, a national common voters roll, regular elections and a multi-party system of democratic government" are founding principles of the 1996 Constitution of South Africa, and the right of all citizens to vote is included in the Bill of Rights.

text: In the post-apartheid era the Constitutional Court has struck down two attempts by the government to deny the vote to convicted criminals in prison. The court has also ruled that South Africans living outside the country must be allowed to vote.

text: List of elections[edit]

text: Since 1910, parliamentary general elections have been held on the following dates.

text:
15 September 1910
20 October 1915
10 March 1920
8 February 1921
19 June 1924
12 June 1929
17 May 1933
18 May 1938
7 July 1943
26 May 1948
15 April 1953
16 April 1958
18 October 1961
30 March 1966
22 April 1970
24 April 1974
30 November 1977
29 April 1981
22 and 28 August 1984 (House of Representatives and House of Delegates)
6 May 1987 (House of Assembly)
6 September 1989 (all three houses)
26–29 April 1994
2 June 1999
14 April 2004
22 April 2009
7 May 2014

tag: ul

text: Last election results[edit]

text: 2014 general election[edit]

text:
e • d

Party
Votes
%
+/−
Seats
+/−

list

African National Congress
11,436,921
62.15
 3.75
249
 15

list

Democratic Alliance
4,091,584
22.23
[a] 4.62
89
[a] 18

list

Economic Freedom Fighters
1,169,259
6.35
New
25
New

list

Inkatha Freedom Party
441,854
2.40
 2.15
10
 8

list

National Freedom Party
288,742
1.57
New
6
New

list

United Democratic Movement
184,636
1.00
 0.16
4
 0

list

Freedom Front Plus
165,715
0.90
 0.07
4
 0

list

Congress of the People
123,235
0.67
 6.75
3
 27

list

African Christian Democratic Party
104,039
0.57
 0.24
3
 0

list

African Independent Congress
97,642
0.53
New
3
New

list

Agang SA
52,350
0.28
New
2
New

list

Pan Africanist Congress
37,784
0.21
 0.07
1
 0

list

African People's Convention
30,676
0.17
 0.04
1
 0

list

Al Jama-ah
25,976
0.14
 0.01
0
 0

list

Minority Front
22,589
0.12
 0.12
0
 1

list

United Christian Democratic Party
21,744
0.12
 0.26
0
 2

list

Azanian People's Organisation
20,421
0.11
 0.11
0
 1

list

Bushbuckridge Residents Association
15,271
0.08
New
0
New

list

Independent Civic Organisation
14,472
0.08
New
0
New

list

Patriotic Alliance
13,263
0.07
New
0
New

list

Workers and Socialist Party
8,331
0.05
New
0
New

list

Ubuntu Party
8,234
0.04
New
0
New

list

Kingdom Governance Movement
6,408
0.03
New
0
New

list

Front National
5,138
0.03
New
0
New

list

Keep It Straight and Simple Party
4,294
0.02
 0.01
0
 0

list

Pan Africanist Movement
3,815
0.02
 0.01
0
 0

list

First Nation Liberation Alliance
3,297
0.02
New
0
New

list

United Congress
3,136
0.02
New
0
New

list

National Party South Africa
2,694
0.02
 0.00
0
 0

list

Peoples Alliance
1,671
0.01
New
0
New

Total
18,402,497
100.00
400

Valid votes
18,402,497
98.65

Spoilt votes
251,960
1.35

Total votes cast
18,654,457
100.00

Registered voters/turnout
25,381,293
73.50

Source: IEC

tag: table

text: ^ Jump up to: a b Compared to the combined performance of the Democratic Alliance, the Independent Democrats and the South African Democratic Convention in 2009.

tag: ol


document_title: Amazon Echo

question_text: what is the point of an amazon echo dot

question_tokens: what is the point of an amazon echo dot

text: Amazon Echo

text: Features[edit]

text: Overview of operation[edit]

text: In the default mode, the device continuously listens to all speech, monitoring for the wake word to be spoken, which is primarily set up as "Alexa" (derived from Alexa Internet, the Amazon-owned Internet indexing company). Echo's microphones can be manually disabled by pressing a mute button to turn off the audio processing circuit.[3]

text: Echo devices require a wireless Internet connection in order to work. Echo's voice recognition capability is based on Amazon Web Services and the voice platform Amazon acquired from Yap,[10] Evi, and IVONA[11] (a Polish-based specialist in voice technologies used in the Kindle Fire).[12]

text: The smart speakers perform well with a 'good' (low-latency) Internet connection which minimizes processing time due to minimal communication round trips, streamable responses and geo-distributed service endpoints. While the application is free, an Amazon account is required, and setup is not possible without one.

text: Available services[edit]

text: Echo device offers weather from AccuWeather and news from a variety of sources, including local radio stations, iHeartRadio, BBC, NPR, and ESPN from TuneIn.[13] Echo can play music from the owner's Amazon Music accounts[14] and has built-in support for the Pandora and Spotify streaming music services[15] and has support for IFTTT and Nest thermostats.[16] Echo can also play music from streaming services such as Apple Music, and Google Play Music from a phone or tablet. Echo maintains voice-controlled alarms, timers, shopping and to-do lists and can access Wikipedia articles. Echo will respond to your questions about items in your Google calendar. It also integrates with Yonomi,[17] Philips Hue, Belkin Wemo, SmartThings, Insteon, and Wink.[18][19] Additionally, integration with the Echo is in the works for Countertop by Orange Chef, Sonos,[20] Scout Alarm, Garageio, Toymail, MARA, and Mojio.[21] Questions like "Who is Kim Kardashian?" are answered by reading the first few lines of the corresponding Wikipedia article.[22]

text: It does not appear to be capable of playing music streamed from a local UPnP/DLNA media server.[citation needed]

text: Echo devices also have access to 'skills' built with the Alexa Skills Kit. These are third-party-developed voice experiences that add to the capabilities of any Alexa-enabled device (such as the Echo). Examples of skills include the ability to play music, answer general questions, set an alarm, order a pizza, get an Uber, and more. Skills are continuously being added to increase the capabilities available to the user. The Alexa Skills Kit is a collection of self-service APIs, tools, documentation and code samples that make it fast and easy for any developer to add skills to Alexa. Developers can also use the "Smart Home Skill API",[23] a new addition to the Alexa Skills Kit, to easily teach Alexa how to control cloud-controlled lighting and thermostat devices. All of the code runs in the cloud – nothing is on any user device. A developer can follow tutorials to learn how to quickly build voice experiences for their new and existing applications.[24]

text: Voice system[edit]

text: The devices have natural lifelike voices resulting from speech-unit technology.[25][additional citation(s) needed] High speech accuracy is achieved through sophisticated natural language processing (NLP) algorithms built into the Echo's text-to-speech (TTS) engine.[citation needed]

text: Software updates[edit]

text: As with all Alexa devices, the functionality of Echo smart speakers periodically evolves as Amazon releases new software for it. Most new releases will fix bugs in addition to including enhanced functionality. New releases are pushed to the devices on a gradual basis so it may take several days to a week or more for a particular device to be updated. Because much of Echo's intelligence lies in the cloud, significant functional enhancements can be made to Echo without updating the software version it is running. For example, in April 2015, the Echo added the ability to give live sports scores without updating the software version,[26] running on the device.

text: Variants[edit]

text: Echo[edit]

text:
Amazon Echo (first generation)

Amazon Echo unpacked, January 2015

Release date

November 6, 2014 (2014-11-06) (Amazon Prime and invited members)
June 23, 2015 (2015-06-23) (released in the U.S.)
September 28, 2016 (2016-09-28) (released in the U.K.)
October 26, 2016 (2016-10-26) (released in Germany)

Introductory price
US$179.99
GB£149.99
EUR€179.99

Connectivity
WiFi and Bluetooth

Website
Amazon Echo (US)
Amazon Echo (UK)
Amazon Echo (Germany)

text:
Amazon Echo (second generation)

Release date

October 31, 2017 (2017-10-31) (released in the U.S.)

Introductory price
US$99.99

Connectivity
WiFi and Bluetooth

Website
Amazon Echo (US)
Amazon Echo (UK)
Amazon Echo (Germany)
Amazon Echo (India)
Amazon Echo (Canada)

text: The first-generation Amazon Echo consists of a 9.25 inch (23.5 cm) tall cylinder speaker with a seven-piece microphone array.[3] The Echo hardware complement includes a Texas Instruments DM3725 ARM Cortex-A8 processor, 256MB of LPDDR1 RAM and 4GB of storage space.[27] As of July 2017, the first-generation Echo maintained an 83% score on GearCaliber, a review aggregator.

text: Although the Echo is intended to be voice-controlled at the unit, a microphone-enabled remote control similar to the one bundled with the Fire TV is available for purchase. An action button on top of the unit is provided for user setup in a new location, and the mute button allows the microphones to be turned off.[28] The top half-inch of the unit rotates to increase or decrease the speaker volume. The Echo must be plugged in to operate since it has no internal battery.[29]

text: Echo provides dual-band Wi-Fi 802.11a/b/g/n and Bluetooth Advanced Audio Distribution Profile (A2DP) support for audio streaming and Audio/Video Remote Control Profile (AVRCP) for voice control of connected mobile devices.[30]

text: Limited editions[edit]

text: As part of a holiday promotion, Seattle Seahawks player Marshawn Lynch drove the Treasure Truck around Seattle in December 2016 selling a limited-edition beast-mode Echo with a custom skin.[31] The beast-mode version was a first-gen Echo that responded to a user's commands with Marshawn Lynch's voice, instead of the Alexa voice.[32]

text: In November 2017, a Product Red version of the 2nd-gen Echo was announced as a limited edition item.[33]

text: Availability[edit]

text: As of February 2017, the second-generation Echo is available in 36 countries.

text:
Austria
 Australia
 Belgium
 Bolivia
 Bulgaria
 Canada
 Chile
 Colombia
 Costa Rica
 Cyprus
 Czech Republic
 Ecuador
 El Salvador
 Estonia
 Finland
 Germany
 Greece
 Hungary
 Iceland
 India
 Latvia
 Liechtenstein
 Lithuania
 Luxembourg
 Malta
 Netherlands
 New Zealand
 Panama
 Peru
 Poland
 Portugal
 Slovakia
 Sweden
 United Kingdom
 United States
 Uruguay

text: Echo Dot[edit]

text: In March 2016, Amazon unveiled the original Amazon Echo Dot,[34] which is a hockey puck-sized version of the Echo designed to be connected to external speakers due to size of the onboard speakers, or to be used in rooms such as the bedroom as an alternative to the full-sized Echo. Beyond these distinctions, the Amazon Echo Dot possesses the same functions as the original Amazon Echo.[35]

text: External portable batteries[36] have been developed for the Amazon Echo Dot by third parties.

text: The second generation of the Amazon Echo Dot was available on October 20, 2016. It is priced lower, has improved voice recognition, and is available in black and white. The Echo Spatial Perception (ESP) technology allows several Echo and Dot units to work together so that only one device answers the request.[citation needed] As of November 2017, the Echo Dot maintained a 78% score on GearCaliber, based on 23 reviews.[37]

text: Amazon Tap[edit]

text: The Amazon Tap is a smaller portable version of the Echo.[38] The Tap can do the same things as the Echo; however, as it is battery-powered, it is also portable.[39] Initially the user had to press an activation button on the front of the Tap to speak commands. However, a February 2017 software update allows the option of activating the Tap with an activation word, just like the Echo and the Dot.[40]

text: Echo Look[edit]

text: In April 2017, the Amazon Echo Look was introduced as a camera with Alexa built-in, for US$20 more than the first-generation Echo.[41] The device can provide artificial intelligence outfit recommendations, take photos, and record videos; in addition to the features available on the Echo.[42] It offers Amazon Alexa's key feature plus a camera to take full-length photos and 360-degree videos with built-in AI for fashion advice.[43][44] As a consumer product, it helps catalog your outfits and rates your look based on “machine learning algorithms with advice from fashion specialists.[45]

text: As of April 2017, the device is available for purchase by invitation-only in the U.S.[46]

text: Echo Show[edit]

text: In May 2017, Amazon introduced the Echo Show, which features a tactile 7-inch LCD screen that can be used for playing media, making video calls (5 MP front camera), and other features.[47] The Echo Show was offered for purchase at a price of $229.99 on June 28, 2017 and was initially only available in the U.S.[48]

text: Echo Spot[edit]

text: On 27 September 2017, Amazon launched the Echo Spot, a hemispherical device that has the same functions as an Echo Show.[49] The device has a 2.5-inch circular screen, and looks like an alarm clock. The device sells for $129.99.[50]

text: Echo Plus[edit]

text: On 27 September 2017, Amazon announced the Echo Plus, scheduled for release on 31 October 2017. It shares design similarities with the first-generation Echo, but also doubles as a smart home hub, connecting to most common wireless protocols to control connected smart devices within a home.[51] It incorporates 7 second-generation far field microphones and noise cancellation, while also supporting Dolby Sound.

text: Accessories[edit]

text: Along with the second-generation Echo, Amazon announced two new accessories. The Echo Buttons can be used while playing games on Echo devices, such as Jeopardy!.[52] The Echo Connect is a small adapter that plugs into any Echo and a home phone line, allowing the Echo to make voice calls through your home phone number.[53]

text: Privacy concerns[edit]

text: There are concerns about the access Echo has to private conversations in the home, or other non-verbal indications that can identify who is present in the home and who is not—based on audible cues such as footstep-cadence or radio/television programming.[54][55] Amazon responds to these concerns by stating that Echo only streams recordings from the user's home when the 'wake word' activates the device, though the device is technically capable of streaming voice recordings at all times, and in fact will always be listening to detect if a user has uttered the word.

text: Echo uses past voice recordings the user has sent to the cloud service to improve response to future questions the user may pose. To address privacy concerns, the user can delete voice recordings that are currently associated with the user's account, but doing so may degrade the user's experience using voice search. To delete these recordings, the user can visit the Manage My Device page on Amazon.com or contact Amazon customer service.

text: Echo uses an address set in the Alexa companion app when it needs a location.[56] Amazon and third-party apps and websites use location information to provide location-based services and store this information to provide voice services, the Maps app, Find Your Device, and to monitor the performance and accuracy of location services. For example, Echo voice services use the user's location to respond to the user's requests for nearby restaurants or stores. Similarly, Echo uses the user's location to process the user's mapping-related requests and improve the Maps experience. All information collected is subject to the Amazon.com Privacy Notice.[57]

text: Amazon retains digital recordings of users' audio spoken after the "wake up word", and while the audio recordings are subject to demands by law enforcement, government agents, and other entities via subpoena, Amazon publishes some information about the warrants it receives, the subpoenas it receives, and some of the warrant-less demands it receives, allowing customers some indication as to the percentage of illegal demands for customer information it receives.[58]

text: Echo as criminal evidence[edit]

text: During the course of the investigation into the November 22, 2015 death of Victor Collins in the home of James Andrew Bates in Bentonville, Arkansas, police sought the data stored on the Amazon Echo on the premises as evidence, but were refused by Amazon.[59][60] The conflict was resolved when Bates consented to the release of his personal information that was held by Amazon.[61][62]

text: Limitations[edit]

text: Purchasing merchandise in the categories of apparel, shoes, jewelry, and watches is not available.[63] In addition, Amazon Fresh, Amazon Prime Pantry, Prime Now, or Add-On items are not supported by Alexa's ordering function,[64] while, the shopping list function allows no more than one item to be added at a time.[65]

text: Echo has provided inconsistent responses when asked common questions to which users would expect better answers. Echo sometimes confuses certain homophones (words that sound the same but have different meanings, such as where/wear/ware).[66]